About your Search

Search Results 0 to 2 of about 3
because people are concerned about the next spending sequestration. and i think, what a bunch of crap. >> did obama say it was the republicans' fault? i saw that. >> i didn't see that. but these are the kinds of things, look at gdp. you can see why it fell. but then people go beyond that and ask it in some femetaphysic way. the dividend fell under pressure. but when you look at what was beyond the gdp components, we had a nice spice in consumer durables. some of that was people buying cars after the storm and so they're spending insurance company money. you had a light increase in inventory compared to the first quarter. that takes some of gdp away. you know you're not going to have that consumer spending for consierms going forward. you have declines in both exports and imports and that had a solid impact on gdp. but you have to be concerned about what's going to happen with exports and, of course, st weak imports. you have to be concerned about that being weak. they're not negative year over year yet, but the flows have slowed down and having declining exports and imports really a b
think 25% of government spending on gdp is an okay number because i've increased entitlements for obama care, i've done other things where i've increased entitlements. i want to bring tax revenues up to 25%. i don't want to meet at 18 or 20 like we've had for so long, would that be okay with you if it was 25%? would that be anti-growth for the private sector? >> my view is you should decide -- what is it you think the government should do. you don't pick a number. you pick a -- >> so -- >> the aging of the population in the u.s. implies that the correct number of white -- >> -- hire -- >> -- is going to change over time because if you say i think the government should be helping people with their retirement through a social insurance like social security then it means the government size number is going to change over time, not just a fixed number. >> but if you look back at the last 60 years the average has been around 22%. >> so yes, if you try to fix it at 22% you're implicitly saying i'm going to pretend like the aging of the population is not happening. so i'm going to fix it, the
of the technology -- a lot of the advances have come from that. so you want to get reimbursed for spending a lot of money to develop them. but then again, we all have this problem with keeping health care costs down and obama care wants generic competition for biologics. what's the right road to take there? >> you know, joe, we've been in this industry for over 135 years. for us, we've taken a focus and we pursue both small molecule as well as bioological routes to address some of the most oppressing diseases out there. if you take alzheimer's, we have the biologic but we have a base inhibitor in phase two -- >> would you pay a lobbyist, would you get lobbyists for eli lilly to try to make it that you don't have to have generic competition for biologics, is that something eli lilly would do, or do you go along with it? >> well, remember, in the affordable care act we did get an extension in terms of data protection, as we should be, to at least 12 years. we believe that's very important for us to have a reasonable period to generate return on investment that we make in r&d. we still are the indu
Search Results 0 to 2 of about 3